[MD] Dynamic within static.

[ml]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Platt Holden" <plattholden at gmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 5:49 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Dynamic within static.


Hi Bo, 

[Platt]
> > Somehow "greater complexity" smacks of a nonexplanation like science's
> > magical "emergence." Besides, it omits the role of DQ which, as you
> > know, is the central actor in Pirsig's evolutionary morality. 

[Bo] 
> Really Platt. Don't you see greater complexity with a mammal 
> organism than an amoeba? Yes it omits DQ's role (I thought that was 
> what you too omitted from various events/change witin the static 
> range?) I just wonder what SQ's role is if everything is DQ? 

[Platt]
The complexity argument strikes me as an example of the Questionable Cause 
fallacy which involves drawing the conclusion that A causes B simply 
because A and B are in regular conjunction. As for SQ's role, Pirsig 
explains the necessity of it. Of that I'm sure you know.   

mel: 
You may see a questionable cause, but in the physical
world we still have "emergent " behaviors that are real.
Take a microgram of U238, study it, watch the decay
Take a gram, study it.
add a little more...
at some point, before you get to a piece
the size of a large grapefruit, you no 
longer need to worry about studying it.
Something magical happens--critical mass.

The world is full of critical thresholds and it is
those that are most interesting, most significant,
most dynamic.

thanks--mel